My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
WSP07795
CWCB
>
Water Supply Protection
>
Backfile
>
7001-8000
>
WSP07795
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/29/2009 10:01:38 PM
Creation date
10/12/2006 2:36:41 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Water Supply Protection
File Number
7630.200
Description
Wild and Scenic-Eagles Nest
State
CO
Date
9/24/1971
Author
USFS
Title
Eagles Nest Wilderness Area-A Proposal-Eagles Nest Wilderness Arapahoe and White River National Forests
Water Supply Pro - Doc Type
Report/Study
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
173
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
<br />26. Pikes Peak Cattlemen's Association <br />27. Rio Blanco Stockgrowers Association <br />28. Rocky Mountain Sportsmen Federation <br />29. Roundup Riders of the Rockies <br />30. Society of American Foresters. Central Rocky Mountain Section <br />31. Society of American Foresters, Allie ill Chapter <br /> <br />2. Proposal (#2) was for 125,000 acres. This includes the 71.785 acres of Proposal <br /># 1, plus the retention of 3,527 acres of the existing Prirrutive Area excluded by <br />Proposal # 1, plus the addition of 49,688 acres of adjacent National Forest lands, <br />and a minor acreage of private lands. <br /> <br />Public reasons for the enlarged, 125,000 acre area covered a full spectrum, <br />but the following were. most often mentioned. <br /> <br />Because population is increasing and Wilderness acreage is limited, there is <br />much concern. People feel this will be accentuated with time and hence more <br />could be done now about increasing the acreage of wilderness than at any future <br />time. <br /> <br />Many were concerned that a wider selection of ecological types should be <br />included in Wilderness to assure a greater variety of wilderness experiences. <br />Coupled with this was. the argument that because of easier accessibility at lower <br />elevations, wilderness could be provided for those who could not physically get <br />to and secure a wilderness experience in the highest and most rugged <br />wildernesses. <br /> <br />A significant number felt that Proposal # 1 was designed to accommodate <br />timber, mining and water development interests rather than the good of the <br />many. <br /> <br />A viewpoint was frequently expressed that time can heal evidence of man <br />and restore the Wilderness character to an area, hence borderline areas should <br />not be excluded because there are evidences of man and his works. <br /> <br />Fourteen hundred and filly-seven persons. thirty-three organizations and two <br />, U.S~ submitted individually written statements in support of this Pro- <br />~ ~al. One hundred and eighty-five people gave oral testimony and nearly four- <br />6 .,^y~V teen thousand more sent signed mass-mailed cards or petition signatures. This <br />) r amounted to fifteen thousand six hundred and four responses for this Proposal <br />or 72.8% of the total. <br /> <br />Citizen Groups which generally favored Proposal #2 (125,000 acres) are <br />listed below. <br /> <br />,. <br /> <br />1. American Canoe Association <br />2. American Legion-Leyden-Chiles-Wickersham Post #1' <br />3. Arizona Mountaineering Club <br />4. Association for Beautiful Colorado Roads <br />5. Colorado Federation of Women's Clubs <br />6. Colorado Grotto. National Speological Society <br />7. Colorado Guides and Outfitters Association, Incorporated <br />8. Colorado Mountain Club <br />.;:9., Colorado Outward Bound School <br />~:~~{. <br /> <br />24 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.